Bush and iraq?

[Harnu 0]

I've been hearing a little bit on the news about Bush wanting to invade Iraq. What the hell is this? Does anyone know of any news sites that have been covering this?

[Tex -USMC- 0]

LOL

Dude, I have seen at least one story on this every single day since 9/11/01. Was it comfortable under that rock? LMAO

[Harnu 0]

Lately all I've been seeing are those miners that just got rescued.  I haven't heard much about Bush and Iraq stuff.

[Aculaud 0]

what was it someone here said a while back about "...we might have to fight fascism again..."? I almost wouldnt be suprised. Hes doing nothing more than trying to make himself look good by being all big and buff with the military backing him up.

[Harnu 0]

Why? Iraq doesn't seem to be posing a very large threat. They know we will most likely win a war agasint them.

[ralphwiggum 6]

guess who won the war against Iraq last time? that's right Bush Sr.!

some republicans think that getting rid of Hussein is imperative, and was suspicious about Iraq's involvement in 9/11.

so they are saying US should attack Iraq. good luck. second Vietnam if you ask me.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

I think we all need to realise that Iraq and So-damn Insane are just not all that much to worry about.

Mr Insane is smart, but hes just a thug. And hes no mad man. He loves power, and he knows that if the US ever got hit by a major terrorist or otherwise attack by weapons of mass destruction, that he would be reduced to a few atoms and a puff of superheated wind. But because he kills some of his citizens and tries to take over his neighbors (no worse really than some of the regimes America has supported in Latin America), he makes a great pariah for American politicians to use to distract the American public. Talking about invading Iraq and kicking So-damn Insane's ass is the American governments version of "HEY! Look over there!!!". It makes a good story, gives the news networks something to discuss (so they wont have to resort to scandal hunting), and, best of all, there are no strings attached. You can call Mr. Insane a madman, say hes developing the dreaded WMD (figure it out), but you dont actually have to do anything- well, maybe blow up some poor dumb ragheads who were dumb enough to turn on their radar in the No Fly Zone, but thats all you have to do to distract America for a month or two. Its beautiful, aint it? The only thing that worries me is that Dubya may be stupid enough to make a commitment to a strong military relationship with So-Damn Insane (A relationship in the same way that the 'War Of The Roses was a relationship).

I hope I cleared it up, if not, too goddam bad

[Harnu 0]

I dunno if it would be another vietnam.  It was pretty easy last time we fought them.  Then again we had an entire coalition.

Bush Sr. had a good reason to attack Saddam.  All Jr. has are suspicions.  I mean, we haven't really turly finished in Afganistan yet.  We should be taking things one at a time.

_

And Tex. We all basically know that already. Personally, I think we should get Clinton back

[ralphwiggum 6]

in today's global community, conducting long-range battle is not easy, even with techno gadgets.

last time, it was COALITION that won. US was able to use Saudi Arabia's bases, and others too. but if US tries to goto war with Iraq without good reason, then it's on its own and that means limited logstics route. and that is suicidal.

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Harnu @ July 30 2002,05:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And Tex.  We all basically know that already.  Personally, I think we should get Clinton back  <span id='postcolor'>

yeah..we need a president who can get down with economics...and....ehhh....interns....

[Jester983 0]

Harnu is right. Before we start to think about fighting saddam we need to finish things in afganisthan (sp?). True we have gotten quite a bit done there but the job is still not finished.

And desert storm was only what a couple days fight? So tex is right too. Saddam is really not something to worry about right now. Sure its a good idea to keep him in mind but theres no need to go and start a war there too unless we have good reasons. and I mean good reasons.

[Harnu 0]

Ya, I know its the Coalition that won.  Thats why I said it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">yeah..we need a president who can get down with economics...and....ehhh....interns....   <span id='postcolor'>

Well you have to admit, Clinton was a pretty good president.  Who cares what he did during his spare time.  That's his own damn business.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And desert storm was only what a couple days fight? So tex is right too. Saddam is really not something to worry about right now. Sure its a good idea to keep him in mind but theres no need to go and start a war there too unless we have good reasons. and I mean good reasons. <span id='postcolor'>

That's cause we had a lot of countries who let us use some of their stuff. Like land. We would need airbases and room for tanks and such. It would be hard for a long range war.

[USSoldier11B 0]

Like it or not, there will be major coalition ground operations in Iraq in the near future. Why else would the put a stop loss on all personnel in the 169th FA Brigade here in Colorado? (NG unit) A unit that is currently undeployable because it is in the middle of converting from Self Propelled Howitzers to MLRS.

[ralphwiggum 6]

starting war doesn't tak account of how military wants it. political and economic considerations are placed too.

should US attack Iraq, it has to do by itself. France won't help, Germany won't, only British with limited resource supply can be expected.

what recent Army excercise could indicate that they are testing whether they are capable of doing some stuffs. not necessarily goto war.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

A NG unit with MLRS?? Sounds like a visit from their Fairy-God-Congressman.

BTW, are they using the old M109 or the newer Paladin variant?

[Harnu 0]

And USSoldier11B. Could you delete some things in your inbox? I can't send you any PM's

[USSoldier11B 0]

Take a wild guess....

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (USSoldier11B @ July 30 2002,06:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Take a wild guess....<span id='postcolor'>

Christ.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ July 30 2002,05:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Harnu @ July 30 2002,05:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And Tex.  We all basically know that already.  Personally, I think we should get Clinton back  <span id='postcolor'>

yeah..we need a president who can get down with economics...and....ehhh....interns....  <span id='postcolor'>

You need a President that knows how to use an Atlas

You need a President that doesnt make up his own words.

You need a President who can colour inside the lines

*puts on his flameproof suit*

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

We should let Sudams people take him out. Bomb Iraq until nothingis left is what I say, give the peopel a chance to get out and then if they don't it will be their fault. If the U.S. did invade Iraq our so called "friends" the britis, french and other countries that the Americans saved from defeat in ww1 and ww2 should help us out.

[ralphwiggum 6]

[sarcasm]

i don't know why Bush is being so pushed around. as long as countries have less than 3 syllables in their name, nothing would be so subliminalable. and if he can't color well, he can ask his father to hire someone for him to do the task.

[/sarcasm]

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (USSoldier11B @ July 30 2002,06:03)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Like it or not, there will be major coalition ground operations in Iraq in the near future. Why else would the put a stop loss on all personnel in the 169th FA Brigade here in Colorado? (NG unit) A unit that is currently undeployable because it is in the middle of converting from Self Propelled Howitzers to MLRS.<span id='postcolor'>

Do you think the Saudis will let the US stage out of their nation? No matter how much they might hate Hussein, do you think they are willing to risk the wrath of the rest of the Arab world?

Also, how do you see countries like Syria and Iran reacting to the US invading Iraq?

Of course, I am not asking you to say anything you cant.

I truly am interested to hear whatyou think...

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

You had better be glad you put it on there Warin! It is not the president who helps are hurts the economy, he gets the blame if its is bad and the cridet if it is good, even though he had nothing to do with it. Good ol' "Slick Willy" was a a man who didn't deserve the seat of President, we need some people iwth morales in that postion. Now I will go and dread the results of this post.

[USSoldier11B 0]

Yeah Tex, most of our congressmen and senators are Republican, as well as the governor. Our National Guard Bureau is well run in this state (relatively) and we get decent funding. BTW, I cleared out my inbox.

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ July 30 2002,06:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You had better be glad you put it on there Warin! It is not the president who helps are hurts the economy, he gets the blame if its is bad and the cridet if it is good, even though he had nothing to do with it.<span id='postcolor'>

so in essence, Reagan didn't do his so-called economic growth